Allegations Against Alan Dershowitz, Removed From The Record

Congratulations to the celebrated defense lawyer and distinguished law professor on this good news.

Yesterday columnist Tamara Tabo wondered when Professor Alan Dershowitz, accused of sexual misconduct with an underage female (in allegations that I personally found dubious), would put up his promised proof of innocence. She noted the possibility, however, that the need for him to do so could be rendered moot if Jane Doe #3 aka Virginia Roberts wasn’t allowed to advance her allegations in litigation under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA).

And that’s exactly what happened, as reported by the Associated Press:

A federal judge rejected a bid by two women to join a high-profile sexual abuse lawsuit and ordered scandalous sex allegations against Britain’s Prince Andrew and a prominent U.S. lawyer removed from the court record.

U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra’s ruling Tuesday came in a case involving wealthy financier Jeffrey Epstein. The two women, identified as Jane Does No. 3 and No. 4, claim to be among dozens of women Epstein sexually abused as teenagers at locations ranging from a Palm Beach mansion to a private Caribbean island to a sprawling New Mexico ranch….

Federal prosecutors opposed allowing the two Jane Does to join the lawsuit, which was filed in 2008, and Marra agreed. “Justice does not require amendment in this instance,” the judge wrote.

Marra also ordered sensational allegations against Prince Andrew and well-known lawyer Alan Dershowitz, a former Harvard Law School professor, stricken from the court record…. Marra said the sex abuse details had no bearing on the lawsuit’s goal of reopening the Epstein non-prosecution agreement.

“The factual details regarding with whom and where the Jane Does engaged in sexual activities are immaterial and impertinent to this central claim,” the judge wrote. “These unnecessary details shall be stricken.”

That is, as some of you may recall, precisely what retired Judge Nancy Gertner wrote in her Above the Law piece about the controversy.

We reached out to Professor Dershowitz for comment. He released the following statement through his counsel, Kendall Coffey of Coffey Burlington (a leading Florida lawyer and former U.S. Attorney for Miami):

A federal judge today granted Professor Alan Dershowitz’s request to strike allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct. In his order, Judge Kenneth A. Marra struck the allegations, which Dershowitz has declared to be utterly false, as a “sanction” against the filing of those allegations. Dershowitz had sought to intervene “for the limited purpose of moving to strike the outrageous and impertinent allegations made against him…” The court responded to Dershowitz’s request by taking it upon itself “to strike the impertinent factual details.” The order further provides that the court’s “action of striking the lurid details from Petitioners’ submissions is sanction enough.” It then cautioned that “all submissions be presented for a proper purpose and factual contentions have evidentiary support.”

Professor Dershowitz described the ruling as “a vindication of my position and as a caution to attorneys against misusing court pleadings for improper purposes.”

Congratulations to Professor Dershowitz and Kendall Coffey on the good news. As noted Miami defense lawyer and former Dershowitz student David O. Markus told the AP, “Judge Marra saw through all the noise and correctly found that this is a court of law, not a tabloid which prints first and looks for evidence later. These absurd allegations have no place in our legal system.”

Sponsored

This isn’t the end of all Epstein-related litigation for Professor Dershowitz. He’s still a defendant in that libel action filed against him by Paul Cassell and Bradley Edwards, counsel to Jane Doe #3 aka Virginia Roberts. But Professor Dershowitz might actually welcome the continuation of that case. With his involvement in the Jane Doe case now over, the defamation case may be the best avenue for completely disproving the allegations against him.

UPDATE (2:45 p.m.): I just raised this possibility in email correspondence with Professor Dershowitz, and he agreed: “Right. I won’t rest until she admits she made it up.”

In his 1982 memoir, The Best Defense (affiliate link), Professor Dershowitz wrote, “Sometimes the public has to be reminded that the word criminal in criminal lawyer — like the word baby in baby doctor — is a description not of the professional, but rather of the clientele.” Alan Dershowitz might represent criminals, but he’s no criminal himself — and those who allege otherwise do so at their peril.

Judge rejects sex allegations against Prince Andrew, lawyer [Associated Press]

Earlier: Alan Dershowitz Fights Back Against Allegations Of Sexual Relations With A Minor
In Search Of Balance In Dershowitz v. Cassell
Does Alan Dershowitz Have A Proof Problem?

Sponsored